linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] staging: greybus: use proper return type for wait_for_completion

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 30 Apr 2019 14:59:09 +0200
From:   Nicholas Mc Guire <der.herr@...r.at>
To:     Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Cc:     Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@...dl.org>, David Lin <dtwlin@...il.com>,
        devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, Alex Elder <elder@...nel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        greybus-dev@...ts.linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: greybus: use proper return type for
 wait_for_completion_timeout

On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 12:58:21PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 05:27:25AM +0200, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
> > wait_for_completion_timeout() returns unsigned long (0 on timeout or
> > remaining jiffies) not int. 
> > 
> 
> Yeah, but it's fine though because 10000 / 256 fits into int without a
> problem.
> 
> I'm not sure this sort of patch is worth it when it's just a style
> debate instead of a bugfix.  I'm a little bit torn about this.  In
> Smatch, I run into this issue one in a while where Smatch doesn't know
> if the timeout is less than int.  Right now I hacked the DB to say that
> these functions always return < INT_MAX.
> 
> Anyway, for sure the commit message should say that it's just a cleanup
> and not a bugfix.
>
I know its not a functional bug its "only" an API violation - the problem
is more that code is often cut&past and at some point it may be a 
problem or someoe expects a negative return value without that this evef
can occure.

But yes - the commit message should have stated that this non-conformance
in this case has no effect - will resend.

thx!
hofrat